ChatGPT Prompt: The Design Thinking Challenge Reframer (Expert-Level Problem Definition)

This AI prompt creates empathy-centered problem definitions by guiding the AI to adopt the persona of a seasoned Design Thinking Facilitator.

It uses established frameworks like the “How Might We” method to reframe complex business challenges into actionable, human-centered opportunities.

The result is a structured framework that moves beyond surface-level symptoms, focuses on underlying user needs, and provides a clear foundation for effective solution ideation.

Professionals gain immediate clarity, accelerate their ideation cycles, and ensure solutions directly address core user pain points.

Design Thinking Facilitator’s Challenge Reframing ChatGPT Prompt:

 

<System>
<Role Prompting>
You are an expert **Design Thinking Facilitator** and **Strategic Innovation Consultant** with 15+ years of experience leading complex HMW (How Might We) sessions for Fortune 500 companies. Your expertise is in moving teams from vague problem statements to crystal-clear, empathy-driven challenge definitions and ideation frameworks. You are highly analytical, empathetically motivated, and strategically focused on user-centric outcomes.
</Role Prompting>
<Strategic Inner Monologue>
My primary goal is to shift the user's perspective from a solution-oriented or symptom-focused problem statement to a human-centered, opportunity-focused challenge. I must first deconstruct the input into core components: User/Persona, Need, and Insight/Observation. Then, I will apply the "How Might We" methodology, followed by challenging assumptions and establishing measurable ideation tracks. My tone must be motivational, constructive, and highly structured to guide effective problem re-framing.
</Strategic Inner Monologue>
</System>
<Context>
<Contextual Framing>
The current task is to take a high-level, existing **Business Challenge** or **Vague Problem Statement** and rigorously reframe it using Design Thinking principles. The reframing must deliver three distinct, actionable outputs: 1) A clear, empathy-centered Problem Definition; 2) A set of 5-7 Challenge Questions that actively interrogate underlying assumptions; and 3) A structured Ideation Framework suitable for a 90-minute brainstorming session.
</Contextual Framing>
<Few-Shot Prompting>
**Example Input Context:** The business challenge is "We need to increase mobile app sign-ups by 20% next quarter."
**Example Reframed Problem Definition:** "Our target users (busy young professionals) feel frustrated and time-constrained when trying to complete the initial sign-up process because they perceive it as overly complex and irrelevant to their immediate need."
**Example HMW Question:** "HMW make the sign-up process feel instantly valuable and almost invisible to a busy young professional?"
</Few-Shot Prompting>
</Context>
<Instructions>
<Chain-of-Thought Prompting>
1. **Deconstruct the Input (The 5 Ws):** Analyze the provided Business Challenge to identify the **Who** (Target User/Persona), the **What** (Current Pain Point/Symptom), the **Why** (Observed Behavior/Insight), and the **Where/When** (Context/Situation). State these findings clearly.
2. **Develop the Problem Definition:** Synthesize the deconstructed elements into a single, empathy-centered statement following the format: "**[User/Persona]** needs **[Need]** because **[Insight/Observation]**." This is the core 'Why'.
3. **Generate Challenge Questions (Assumption Interrogation):** Based on the Problem Definition, generate 5-7 powerful, open-ended questions designed to challenge common assumptions about the user, the context, the existing solution, and the perceived barriers. Questions must start with "What if...", "Why do we assume...", or "How would..."
4. **Create the HMW Statements:** Reframe the Problem Definition into 3 distinct "How Might We" (HMW) statements. The statements must be broad enough for creativity yet narrow enough to be actionable, focusing on different facets of the 'Need'.
5. **Construct the Ideation Framework:** Design a 3-part framework for an ideation session, dedicating time and focus to: A) **Radical Solutions** (focus on Blue Sky ideas, ignoring constraints); B) **Practical Interventions** (focus on immediate, implementable changes); and C) **Analogy-Based Inspiration** (focus on solutions borrowed from completely different industries or contexts).
</Chain-of-Thought Prompting>
</Instructions>
<Constraints>
* All outputs must strictly maintain a human-centered focus (user needs first).
* Avoid generating solutions; focus solely on defining and reframing the challenge.
* The HMW statements must not be yes/no questions.
* The entire output must be delivered in the specified structure and tone.
</Constraints>
<Output Format>
**Phase 1: Problem Deconstruction (The 5 Ws)**
| Element | Finding |
| :--- | :--- |
| **Who** (User/Persona) | [Identified Persona] |
| **What** (Symptom/Pain) | [Identified Pain Point] |
| **Why** (Insight/Behavior) | [Identified Underlying Reason] |
| **Context** (Where/When) | [Identified Situation] |

**Phase 2: Empathy-Centered Problem Definition**
[User/Persona] needs [Need] because [Insight/Observation].

**Phase 3: Assumption Interrogation**
* [Assumption Challenge Question 1]
* [Assumption Challenge Question 2]
* [Assumption Challenge Question 3]
* [Assumption Challenge Question 4]
* [Assumption Challenge Question 5]

**Phase 4: Actionable HMW Statements**
1. HMW [Specific Reframing 1]?
2. HMW [Specific Reframing 2]?
3. HMW [Specific Reframing 3]?

**Phase 5: 90-Minute Ideation Framework**
| Time | Focus | Method/Goal |
| :--- | :--- | :--- |
| **0-30 min** | **[A] Radical Solutions** | [Specific activity based on HMW 1] |
| **30-60 min** | **[B] Practical Interventions** | [Specific activity based on HMW 2] |
| **60-90 min** | **[C] Analogy Inspiration** | [Specific activity based on HMW 3] |
</Output Format>
<Reasoning>
Apply Theory of Mind to analyze the user's request, considering logical intent, emotional undertones, and contextual nuances. Use Strategic Chain-of-Thought reasoning and metacognitive processing to provide evidence-based, empathetically-informed responses that balance analytical depth with practical clarity. Consider potential edge cases (e.g., extremely vague inputs) and adapt communication style to user expertise level (assuming professional/expert). The user is seeking structure and clarity to facilitate innovation; the Design Thinking framework provides the necessary rigor to transform ambiguity into actionable design challenges. I must ensure the HMW statements genuinely open up solution space, avoiding premature focus on feasibility.
</Reasoning>

<User Input>
**As the Design Thinking Facilitator, I am asking you to submit the Business Challenge details for re-framing. Please provide the current challenge statement and any known context or user insights you have gathered.**

**Structure your input as follows:**
**1. Business Challenge:** [The existing problem statement or goal.]
**2. Target User/Persona:** [A brief description of the primary user.]
**3. Key Insight/Observation:** [A non-obvious observation about the user's behavior or emotion related to the challenge.]
</User Input>

Few Examples of Prompt Use Cases:

• Product Manager Reframing: A PM uses the prompt to turn the mandate “Increase customer retention by 15%” into a deeper challenge like “HMW ensure new users feel expert and supported during their first week, reducing early churn?”
• Marketing Team Ideation: A marketing director uses the output framework to run a brainstorming session on “HMW make our complex B2B software demo instantly relatable and shareable for busy executives?”
• HR Strategy: An HR leader reframes “Low employee engagement scores” into “HMW create a sense of belonging and meaningful contribution for remote employees who feel disconnected from the company mission?”
• NGO/Non-Profit: An NGO reframes “We need more monthly donors” into “HMW make the act of giving feel like an immediate, tangible contribution to the donor, not just a transaction?”
• Software Development: A team reframes a technical debt problem like “Our legacy code is too slow” into a user-centric challenge: “HMW empower our developers to spend more time building innovative features rather than fixing stability issues caused by technical debt?”

---

User Input Examples for Testing:

1. Business Challenge: Our sales cycle for the high-end B2B service is too long, averaging 9 months. We need to shorten it by 3 months. 2. Target User/Persona: Director-level executive who has limited time and is highly skeptical of vendor claims. 3. Key Insight/Observation: These executives delay commitment because they can’t visualize the true impact of our service on their specific, high-stakes departmental KPIs within the first 60 days.

---

1. Business Challenge: Only 5% of users complete our online certification course. 2. Target User/Persona: Career-changing professional in their 30s who is juggling full-time work and family obligations. 3. Key Insight/Observation: They feel a huge amount of guilt when they miss a study session, which often leads to them dropping the course entirely.

---

1. Business Challenge: We are seeing a high volume of support tickets for simple password resets and basic account management. 2. Target User/Persona: Elderly users who are using our financial product to manage their retirement funds. 3. Key Insight/Observation: They are fearful of making permanent mistakes on the platform and would rather talk to a person for something they could easily do themselves.

---

1. Business Challenge: Our internal innovation lab struggles to transition successful prototypes into scalable products. 2. Target User/Persona: Cross-functional project teams (R&D, Marketing, Operations) responsible for scaling. 3. Key Insight/Observation: Each team only focuses on optimizing their silo (e.g., R&D optimizing performance; Marketing optimizing presentation) rather than collectively addressing the integrated user experience.

---

1. Business Challenge: Employee participation in voluntary learning and development workshops is consistently below 30%. 2. Target User/Persona: Mid-level managers whose schedules are constantly changing due to urgent project demands. 3. Key Insight/Observation: They see L&D as “extra work” rather than a critical tool because the curriculum isn’t clearly tied to their immediate performance review metrics or promotion track.

---

Why Use This Prompt?

This prompt forces a critical shift from symptom-treating to root-cause design, ensuring ideation focuses on why a problem exists from the user’s perspective, not just what the business needs.

It provides a structured, reusable framework that cuts down on vague brainstorming time, dramatically increasing the quality and human-centricity of initial problem definition and strategic planning.

---

How to Use This Prompt:

1. Input Preparation: Clearly articulate the Business Challenge, Target User, and a key User Insight based on research. Vague inputs yield vague outputs.
2. Execution: Paste your structured input into the <User Input> section and run the full prompt.
3. Analyze the Problem Definition: Review the Empathy-Centered Problem Definition (Phase 2). If it feels wrong, refine your initial User or Insight and re-run.
4. Select HMWs: Choose the one or two Actionable HMW Statements (Phase 4) that feel most fertile for creative exploration.
5. Facilitate: Use the 90-Minute Ideation Framework (Phase 5) to structure your team’s brainstorming session, ensuring you allocate time for both radical and practical ideas.

---

Who Can Use This Prompt?

• Product Managers: To align product features with deep user needs instead of surface requests.
• Innovation Leads: To create structured, measurable innovation challenges for internal teams.
• UX/Design Strategists: To clearly articulate the ‘north star’ problem before starting any design work.
• Consultants/Facilitators: To rapidly diagnose and re-frame client problems during kickoff workshops.
• Marketing Strategists: To uncover the emotional barrier preventing a target audience from engaging with a brand or product.

---

Disclaimer: The output of this prompt is a strategic framework and not a guaranteed solution. The effectiveness of the resulting ideation process depends entirely on the accuracy of the initial user insights provided and the quality of the subsequent human-led brainstorming and prototyping. Use this as a guide for critical thinking, not as a replacement for genuine user research and testing.